When is it OK to disallow swims

After the top ten, AA, have been deemed final, then NO, the rankings should not be changed. Jimbo has gotten a royal screwing by usms in this case. If the pool issue wasn't addressed during the period where challenges or changes could be addressed, then it shouldn't addressed after the final rankings are published. Jimbo, you are still the #1 100 freestyle in my book, regardless of the screwing you have been given after the fact. I agree w/ thewookie. Well stated wookie.

After the top ten, AA, have been deemed final, then NO, the rankings should not be changed. Jimbo has gotten a royal screwing by usms in this case. If the pool issue wasn't addressed during the period where challenges or changes could be addressed, then it shouldn't addressed after the final rankings are published. Jimbo, you are still the #1 100 freestyle in my book, regardless of the screwing you have been given after the fact. There is no dispute that Jim had the fastest time in the 100 LCM freestyle for United States men, aged 60-64, in 2012. That swim will not be recognized by USMS, because it was not supported by a certified measurement that the pool is the proper length. Although the USAS team, that owns and runs the pool (NBAC) claims that the pool is the correct length, they have not provided such certification. USMS has on file a certification stating that when the pool was measured (while empty of water) it was an inch or two short. I don't know if NBAC is right, but I do think that they believe their pool is the proper length. USMS will not accept Jim's swim because they believe that the rule requiring that the pool be certified as the correct length, leaves them no choice but to disallow it. I agree that the decision reached by USMS would be correct in most cases, but because of the extenuating circmstances mentioned on the previous posts it is not a fair decision in Jim's case and creates an unjust result. However, I can understand the thought process of the Top 10 Committee.

This involved riding in the back seat of a motor vehicle for a big part of the run. That's my kind of run! :banana:

I got a message that a meet this past fall in the NW at the infamous Tualatin Hills Rec. Center didn't make the measurements requirement. The bulkhead ended up being short for a few/most of the lanes. My only gripe...the records were sent to me for the Zone records, and updated (back in October). Now apparently I need to strike these records, and attempt to figure out who/what/when/etc. had the record previously. Shouldn't the pool measurement issue have come up a while ago, before the notice of records was ever given out (in addition to the potential Top Tens that were stricken as well)??. Jim, that will be a tough problem to fix. You may have to send an email to everyone in your LMSC and ask if you deleted one of their records then you can go to the USMS data base and verify their time. That might be more efficient and accurate than using your memory to recreate the deleted records through the USMS data base. The meet will go down in history as the "meet that never was".

I got a message that a meet this past fall in the NW at the infamous Tualatin Hills Rec. Center didn't make the measurements requirement. The bulkhead ended up being short for a few/most of the lanes. My only gripe...the records were sent to me for the Zone records, and updated (back in October). Now apparently I need to strike these records, and attempt to figure out who/what/when/etc. had the record previously. Shouldn't the pool measurement issue have come up a while ago, before the notice of records was ever given out (in addition to the potential Top Tens that were stricken as well)??

Jim you may appreciate this: there is a flip side to this phenomenon and possibly it is more common (Anna Lea can say for sure): vanity aging. That's when (usually middle-aged) swimmers enter a younger age than their actual years. It puts them at a competitive disadvantage with respect to swimming achievements but perhaps they are interested in something other than TT rankings... One of the humorous events I remember from the master's club I swam with 30 years ago was a then 50-ish female club member who did exactly this. As a 20-something at the time I thought it was pretty funny that somebody would do that. Now that I'm approaching 60, I still don't particularly understand the motivation, but am much more empathetic to it. On subject, how difficult would it be for the TT recorders to not post swims from pools that don't meet USMS measurement requirements? It seems that Jim's case would have been better handled if the swim wasn't in the preliminary TT list because the pool didn't meet USMS requirements, giving him the opportunity to either work to get the measurements/paperwork submitted or find out that the swim wouldn't count at a much better point in the process.

On subject, how difficult would it be for the TT recorders to not post swims from pools that don't meet USMS measurement requirements? TTRs are not supposed to submit times from meets where the pool hasn't been measured. And if they did, normally Mary Beth would not have included the times in the TT lists. In the Tualatin Hills meet referred to earlier in this thread she did pull those times from the SCM TT list she is compiling right now. I'm not sure why the times were submitted in the first place; possibly the TTR didn't realize the pool was short (the measurements of the 25m pool were in feet & inches so it isn't necessarily obvious at a glance). As for why this wasn't done in the case of the now-infamous NBAC meet, that was described in the other thread.

I'm currently the ILMSA top ten recorder. When I do the top ten submissions for a particular season, Mary Beth wants to see the pool measurement forms or know that they are already in Walt Reid's spreadsheet. Was this meet at Tualatin Hills a non-USMS meet of some sort?

I'm currently the ILMSA top ten recorder. When I do the top ten submissions for a particular season, Mary Beth wants to see the pool measurement forms or know that they are already in Walt Reid's spreadsheet. Was this meet at Tualatin Hills a non-USMS meet of some sort? Sanctioned meet, bulkhead pool had already been certified and was on the list. Looking at the measurements, both pre- and post-meet measurements were short so it wasn't a matter of the bulkhead moving it was a matter of the meet organizers not realizing that 25m converts to 82 feet 0.25 inches (a fact that is on the back of the measurement form).

I got a message that a meet this past fall in the NW at the infamous Tualatin Hills Rec. Center didn't make the measurements requirement. The bulkhead ended up being short for a few/most of the lanes. My only gripe...the records were sent to me for the Zone records, and updated (back in October). Now apparently I need to strike these records, and attempt to figure out who/what/when/etc. had the record previously. Shouldn't the pool measurement issue have come up a while ago, before the notice of records was ever given out (in addition to the potential Top Tens that were stricken as well)?? The SCM configuration at that pool is like nothing I've ever seen before. Here's a fun thing to try: stand on deck by the bulkhead for the fast heat of a 50 event, or the 100 free or 100 IM. Watch what happens when several swimmers all turn and push off the bulkhead at about the same time.